Background
Introduction
Guideline association or guideline group | Year | Type of surgery | Stratification by procedure (Yes/No) | Number (percentage) of procedure specific recommendations for abdominal and/or pelvic surgerya | Number (percentage) of procedure specific recommendations for all surgeriesa |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS) | 2020 | Vulvar and vaginal | No | 0 | 0 |
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) | 2019 | Major cancer | No | 0 | 0 |
American Society of Hematology (ASH) | 2019 | All | Partlyb | 3 (60%) | 5 (38%) |
International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer (ITAC-CME) | 2019 | Cancer | No | 0 | 0 |
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society | 2018 | Elective colorectal | No | 0 | 0 |
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (of the United Kingdom) | 2018 | All | Noc | 0 | 14 (30%) |
Southern African Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis | 2018 | Obstetrics and gynecology | No | 0 | 0 |
The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons | 2018 | Colorectal | No | 0 | 0 |
Asian Venous Thrombosis Forum (AVTF) working group | 2017 | All | No | 0 | 0 |
European Association of Urology (EAU) | 2017 | Urology | Yes | 23 (100%) | 23 (100%) |
European Society of Anesthesiology (ESA) | 2017 | All | Nod | 0 | 6 (21%) |
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS) | 2016 | Gynecologic oncology | No | 0 | 0 |
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS) | 2016 | Liver surgery | No | 0 | 0 |
Thrombosis Canada | 2016 | Non-orthopedic | No | 0 | 0 |
The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) | 2014 | General abdominal Gynecologic Bariatric | Noe | 0 | 6 (21%) |
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS) | 2013 | Pancreaticoduodenectomy | Yesf | 1 (100%) | 1 (100%) |
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS) | 2013 | Radical cystectomy | Yesf | 1 (100%) | 1 (100%) |
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS) | 2013 | Elective rectal/pelvic | No | 0 | 0 |
American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) | 2012 | Non-orthopedic | No | 0 | 0 |
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (of Australia) | 2012 | All | Nog | 0 | 10 (34%) |
American Urological Association (AUA) | 2009 (reviewed 2011) | Urologic | No | 0 | 0 |
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) | 2007 | Gynecologic | No | 0 | 0 |
Methods/design
Eligibility criteria
General surgery | Gynecology |
---|---|
1. Colectomy | 1. Vulvectomy (hemivulvectomy) |
2. Proctocolectomy | 2. Trachelectomy (cervicectomy) |
3. Abdominoperineal resection | 3. Cervical conization |
4. Hernia repair (groin, umbilical) | 4. Adnexal surgery |
5. Hernia repair (ventral) | 5. Sterilization |
6. Cholecystectomy | 6. Hysterectomy |
7. Gastrectomy | 7. Surgery for ovarian cancer |
8. Pancreaticoduodenectomy | 8. Pelvic exenteration |
9. Distal pancreatectomy | 9. Surgery for vaginal cancer (colpectomy) |
10. Liver resection | 10. Myomectomy |
11. Appendectomy | 11. Colposuspension |
12. Sleeve gastrectomy | 12. Sacrocolpopexy |
13. Gastric bypass | 13. Transvaginal mesh |
14. Splenectomy (elective) | 14. Vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery (without mesh) |
15. Small bowel resection | 15. Perineoplasty |
16. Rectopexy | 16. Mid-urethral tape/sling |
17. Urethral bulking | |
18. Deep endometriosis surgery | |
19. Uterine artery embolization | |
20. Hysteroscopy | |
21. Dilatation and curettage | |
22. Transvaginal oocyte retrieval |
Outcomes
Study selection and data abstraction
Literature search, study selection, application of eligibility criteria, and data abstraction
Characteristics | |
---|---|
Age | Use of anticoagulantsa |
Gender | Use of aspirin or other antiplateletsb |
Proportion of patients with malignancy | Use of mechanical thromboprophylaxisc |
Assessment of risk of bias and outliers (final selection of eligible studies)
Domaina | Low risk of bias | High risk of bias |
---|---|---|
Sampling | Consecutive patient recruitment or administrative database with random sampling | Non-consecutive patient recruitment or administrative database with non-random sampling |
Thromboprophylaxis documentation | Reporting of patients’ thromboprophylaxis | No reporting of patients’ thromboprophylaxis |
Source of information | Prospective data collection by study investigators Retrospective duplicate chart reviews with good documentation of agreement between reviewers | Retrospective duplicate chart reviews without documentation of agreement between reviewers Administrative database information |
Recruitment years | Studies with the majority of patient recruitment years 2010 or after | Studies with the majority of patient recruitment years 2009 or before |
Specification of length of follow-up | Studies that clearly define the time period of follow-up (up to 3 months) | Studies that do not clearly define the time period of follow-up |
Study type | International multicenter; Multicenter in one country; Single center, not single surgeon | Single surgeon series |
Overall risk of biasa | No high risk of bias domains: Very low risk of bias One high risk of bias domain: Low risk of bias Two high risk of bias domains: Moderate risk of bias Three or more high risk of bias domains: High risk of bias |